Spashes in a lake.

More
20 years 1 month ago #11991 by tvanflandern
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rousejohnny</i>
<br />Wouldn't it be likely that that the radiation of the CMB is observational evidence of elysium displacement generated by the motion of Higher Scale matter like galaxy clusters all the way up and down the line?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The microwave radiation is very likely to be simply the re-radiation of energy absorbed from distant star-and-galaxy light. Eddington calculated the available amount of this energy in 1930, and found that the minimum temperature of anything in space would be 3 degrees K. And that is the temperature of the "background" radiation found by Penzias & Wilson in 1964. -|Tom|-

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 1 month ago #11901 by rousejohnny
Replied by rousejohnny on topic Reply from Johnny Rouse
Shouldn't there be someway to observe the havoc all of the higher scale matter must generate in the elysium sea. The waves and currents of elysium displacement must have some effect we could look for. What technology would be needed, where should we look for the effect that has no alternative explaination? I know Meta Model needs particles to produce a "field", but would an unobservable neutrally charge energy field provide mass as well as stealth?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 1 month ago #11621 by Astrodelugeologist
Replied by Astrodelugeologist on topic Reply from
Tom,

Was the energy predicted by Eddington blackbody radiation, as the CMB is?

And isn't the current measurement of the CMB temperature around 2.7 K? How is the discrepancy between Eddington's calculation and the latest measurements explained?

--Astro

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 1 month ago #11622 by tvanflandern
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rousejohnny</i>
<br />Shouldn't there be someway to observe the havoc all of the higher scale matter must generate in the elysium sea. The waves and currents of elysium displacement must have some effect we could look for.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Waves in elysium are electromagnetic waves (e.g., light) by definition of "elysium" (the light-carrying medium). We are continually detecting such waves from all over the cosmos. -|Tom|-

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
20 years 1 month ago #11623 by tvanflandern
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Astrodelugeologist</i>
<br />Was the energy predicted by Eddington blackbody radiation, as the CMB is?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The short answer is "yes".

There has been some technical dispute about elysium not being "optically thick", which is ordinarily a requirement for a black body spectrum. However, that requirement is needed to assure thermodynamic equilibrium. But elysium is in thermodynamic equilibrium in the visible universe because of its vast extent. Any heat leakage must be farther out in the universe than our best telescopes can see, and has no visible consequences for the parts we can see.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">And isn't the current measurement of the CMB temperature around 2.7 K? How is the discrepancy between Eddington's calculation and the latest measurements explained?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Eddington's calculation was rough and approximate because in 1930, this was a purely theoretical issue, and the extent of the known universe was much smaller than it is today.

Eddington's extimate was improved to 2.8 degrees by Regener in 1933, and confirmed by Nerost in 1937. Finlay-Freundlich extended the calculation to the universe at large in 1954. All theoretical estimates now lie in the same range as the measured microwave background temperature. -|Tom|-

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.470 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum